YESHIVAT HAR ETZION

ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)

*********************************************************

TALMUDIC METHODOLOGY
By Rav Moshe Taragin

For easy printing, go to

www.vbm-torah.org/archive/metho74/24metho.htm

Shiur #24: The Letters of Tefillin

The gemara in Shabbat (62a) discusses the violation of carrying tefillin into
a bathhouse. Typically, sacred items may be carried into a bathhouse if they are
covered, but tefillin may not be brought inside even though the texts are covered
by the tefillin boxes. The gemara explains that this is because of the “shin” of the
tefillin shel rosh. There is a Halakha Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai requiring that a shin be
engraved on the boxes housing the tefillin. Since it is exposed to the
surroundings, the tefillin cannot be brought into a bathhouse.

The text of our gemara lists two other “exposed” parts of the tefillin that are
required due to a Halakha Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai and cannot be brought into a
bathhouse – the daled shaped leather strap by which the tefillin shel rosh is
affixed and the small yud shaped strap that is nestled aside the tefillin shel yad.
Together with the shin engraved on the tefillin shel rosh, these letters form the
holy name Sha-ddai. Since these letters are all exposed, the tefillin cannot be
brought into bathhouse.

Throughout his commentary to Shas, Rashi equates all three letters – the
shin, daled, and yud. This is evident in his interpretation of an interesting
statement of R. Eliezer (Berakhot 57a; Megilla 16b) that highlights the unique
status of tefillin shel rosh. Several gemarot cite the verse in Devarim (28:10) that
describes foreign nations beholding the manner in which the name of Hashem
“appears” upon a Jew. The simple reading of the verse is that this is a metaphor
– our behavior and identity is closely affiliated with Hashem, and this is (or at
least one day will be) noticed by all. However, R. Eliezer took this verse literally
as well – by donning TEFILLIN SHEL ROSH, a Jew literally fastens the name of
Hashem to himself. Why did R. Eliezer highlight the head tefillin as possessing
the name of Hashem, as opposed to the hand tefillin? Rashi explains that the
head tefillin contains the shin engraved upon its box and the daled shaped strap
that secures the tefillin, thus containing TWO of the three letters comprising the
name Sha-ddai. Hence, it is specifically the tefillin shel rosh that showcases the
essential name of Sha-ddai. Rashi equates all three letters, giving the “nod” to
the tefillin that contains the majority of the letters.

A different gemara differentiates between the shin and the other two
letters. Logically, this distinction stems from the fact that the daled and yud are
shaped with leather straps, whereas the shin is actually engraved on the leather
housing of the tefillin. The context of this distinction is a discussion in the gemara
in Shabbat (28) as to whether hides for tefillin can be taken from non-kosher
animals. The gemara cites a pasuk that instructs that all TORAH be written on
items that are legally consumable. Applying this to the skins used to construct the
housing of tefillin, the gemara insists that even these must be taken from kosher
animals. Since the tefillin shel rosh feature the shin of the name Sha-ddai, the
boxes are considered Torah and kosher hides are mandated. The leather straps
of the tefillin, however, are not considered Torah texts and are not included in the
principle that Torah texts must be inscribed upon kosher skins.

The gemara here only refers to the shin, ignoring the daled and yud! This
serves as the source for Tosafot’s position that ONLY the shin is an actual
Halakha Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai; the daled and the yud are not. Based on this
distinction, Tosafot emends the gemara in Shabbat 62a to omit the mention of
daled and yud as a Halakha Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai.

Reconciling Rashi’s position with the gemara’s distinction is a bit

challenging. He obviously equates the daled and yud to the shin by classifying
each as a Halakha Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai, whereas the gemara that demands
kosher skins based on the status of Torah texts only discusses the tefillin shel
rosh housing and not the leather straps used to create a daled and yud.

The simplest approach is to distinguish between the status of a Halakha

Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai and the status of Torah texts. Indeed, the daled and yud
shaped straps possess the status of Halakha Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai. However,
leather straps cannot be considered “text” and are therefore not limited by the
kosher hide clause that governs all Torah texts. This position is cited by the
Chiddushei HaRan in his comments to the Rif (Shabbat 62a).

The possible flaw in this approach is the prohibition of bringing tefillin into
a bathhouse, which (at least according to Rashi’s version of the gemara in
Shabbat 62) applies equally to the shin and the daled and yud. Evidently
according to the Ran’s logic, any component of tefillin that stems from a Halakha
Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai cannot be exposed in a bathhouse, even though only the shin
is considered actual halakhic text and the daled and yud do not enjoy that status.
 The alternate approach to that of the Ran is to assume that Rashi granted
FULL text status to the daled and yud shaped leather straps. Perhaps in formal
contexts, such as the melakha of writing on Shabbat, these leather based shapes
would not constitute actual halakhic text. However, for tefillin purposes, they are
considered text because they represent the letters of Sha-ddai. Since they are
considered text, they cannot be brought into a bathhouse. However, for some
reason, the rule of employing kosher hides for Torah texts does not apply in this
case.

The Ramban (Shabbat 28) suggests that although the straps may be
considered texts, since these straps can be untied, they do not possess the
typical kedusha status of Torah texts. Absent this KEDUSHA, they do not
demand kosher skins in the same manner as the parchment upon which the
actual portions of tefillin are written or the skins of the outer housing of the shel
rosh. The latter texts possess full kedusha status and mandate kosher hides.

R. Soloveitchik noted that this Ramban may parallel the case of a different
Scriptural text that does not accord with the typical guidelines because it is not a
permanent object. The Yerushalmi in Sota claims that the text used for the sota
ceremony (which is taken from Parashat Naso) may be written on non-kosher
hides since it will ultimately be erased. Presumably, the fact that it will be erased
as part of the sota ceremony strips the text of its kedusha and, bereft of the
kedusha status that normally applies to Scriptural texts, it can be written on non-
kosher hides. Similarly, the letter shaped straps of the tefillin may become
unraveled, and therefore do not possess kedusha status.

To be sure, tefillin is slightly different from a sota text. The latter will
definitely be erased as PART of the sota ceremony, whereas the daled and yud
leather shapes MAY become unraveled. Rabbenu Eliyahu (one of the Tosafists)
indeed claimed that tefillin must be reformatted on a daily basis and the various
leather strap letters must be reconstructed, but most opinions reject this demand
and allow the leather strap letter to remain permanently. Presumably, according
to the Ramban, the very fact that these letters MAY unravel entails that there is
no kedusha and permits non-kosher hides to be employed.

A different solution is asserted by the Ohr Sameach in his comments on

the Rambam. Even if the daled and yud are considered halakhic texts similar to
the shin, they are not considered Torah texts because they do not reflect the
name Sha-ddai in the same way the shin does. Since the shin is the first letter of
the name Sha-ddai, it symbolically denotes the name. Letters can only be
considered a Torah text requiring kosher hides if they signify one of the names of
Hashem.